Jaroslaw Swierczynski wrote: > I'm not sure whether this was discussed before (I mean recently, it > might have been brought up a long time ago but a lot has changed > since). > > Althought reiser4 still has not accepted by Linus, it seems it's > fairly stable and very popular. I've just had a look at the reiser4 > patch [1] and it seems it does not modify the kernel in a way which > could disrupt its normal opration. Mostly it's symbols exporting, only > the code fs/fs-writeback.c is actually modified but in my view those > changes does not affect the original behaviour of the kernel. > > You have to admit that Arch's kernel package has many more complex > patches. I'm not saying that we should add reiser4 support to the > installer etc. Just make users life easier, save their time. If I'm > right (and I might not since I'm obviously not a kernel hacker) > inclusion of reiser4 wouldn't drop stability of the kernel nor affect > any other subsystem. > > Opinions? > > 1. > ftp://ftp.namesys.com/pub/reiser4-for-2.6/2.6.21/reiser4-for-2.6.21.patch.gz >
IMO: No no no and again: no. We already have too many packages that have patches. I'm very against. _______________________________________________ arch mailing list [email protected] http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
